Does Barack Obama Favor Sex Education For Kindergartners?

[TheMouthPeace]

Obama said this was the "principal" reason for the bill. Where does this show up in the bill? Certainly not in the first paragraph and not on the first page.

...and it is to stop advances from OTHER KIDS! Not ADULT PREDATORS!

You selectively edited that out, didn't you.

A liar will always defend a liar.

[jsand19]

the legislation doesn't state that there should be a sex-ed class for kindergarteners, it says that if there is one it should cover the stated topics. plus "No pupil shall be required to take or participate in any" such class if parent's do not want them to. that's it....way to misinterpret the context....get some real arguments

[TheMouthPeace]

Of course it says there should be a class. Did you not read it. Of course parents can opt out, so what? The McCain ad never mentions that parents would not be able to opt out. Parents can always opt out.

This does mandate that there be a class. That kids do not have to attend at gunpoint is hardly a defense. I can take my child out of school for any reason on any day.

You are defending someone who has become a habitual liar. How sad that you have lost your ability to think for yourself.

[PhilmontGal]

Excellent! Excellent! Excellent video.... you weren't mean or rude, you didn't make nasty offhand comments. You simply pointed out, in a very ingenious fashion, Obama's ridiculous hypocrisy. *applaus*

[SukreetGable]

you are cowardly rubbish not to allow all comments to be posted. how sad for you.

[TheMouthPeace]

Sorry, I missed your point.

[Lauralou12579]

I LOVE Your videos! the are one of the most comprehensive sources of fact that i've been able to find- you tell the truth (and BACK IT UP) in an easy to understand manner- none of this politispeak that i'm sick and tired of! Thank you!

[garysbasem3nt]

"SB 99: However, no pupil shall be required to take or participate in any family life class or course on HIV AIDS or family life instruction if his parent or guardian submits written objection thereto, and refusal to take or participate in such course or program shall not be reason for suspension or expulsion of such pupil."

[TheMouthPeace]

Was this mentioned in McCain's ad? The fact that a parent can opt out makes McCain a liar? Is that what you are saying?

This is the most ridiculous defense for this astonishingly silly piece of legislation I could imagine.

Unfortunately most parents would not even know. You would have to got to the school district headquarters to see the curriculum.

Where is "sex predator" in the bill? Show me.

[InsanelyxLogical]

When 5-year-olds start having sex, then there's a problem. Until then, I don't see what your issue is.

[nomonameo]

Good video showing just the facts.

Obama LIES so easily and convincingly.

Please get this out more.

(maybe try to get the video down to 3 minutes for my ADHD self?)

[edwardvondoom]

These days, there are few rewards for critical thinking. Many political ads are an insult to the intelligence. If you were to see a TV ad charging that a politician supported "comprehensive sex education" for kindergarten children, would you (1) believe it, or (2) very much doubt it? The authors of the ad spent big money in a bet on the credulity and unquestioning thinking of the viewership. Ask yourself what such an ad believes about us.

[GOlynnGO]

The truth is there is no such thing as "age appropriate" when it comes to sex and small children. Government has no business teaching 5 year olds anything about sex, and Obama's attempt to pander to radical special interest agendas should be exposed for just what they are - radical. Sex education is a sensitive subject best left up to parents.

[DaveNC72]

Amen to that. We need more parents being responsible and less government.

[torpedojack]

You forgot that the USA were founded upon secular principles.

[TheMouthPeace]

Google This...

NEW YORK TIMES

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

By STEPHEN LABATON

Spetember 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant

regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings

and loan crisis a decade ago.

[TheMouthPeace]

Laissez Faire never existed. Regulations mandated that banks issue low-income loans. Regulations like that caused this, not the free market. Fannie never was, is, or will be a free-market institution. It is a GSE, or Government-Sponsored Enterprise. They took excessive risks because they knew that the government would always bail them out, and look what happened. The lack of a free market caused this.

[TheMouthPeace]

Did you not read? John McCain proposed a bill for TIGHTER regulation of Fannie. You are a prime example of how the media creates myths that uninformed voters believe. What policy that was so detrimental? Which one? It was the Clinton Administration that imposed fines on banks that did not issue low-income mortgages.  Guess what? They bought houses, they bid the prices up, now they are defaulting. More leftist social engineering run amok! And you blame McCain for it. What a joke!

[monkeychunck]

Obama is just down right wrong for families and a culture of life.

[blangston86]

i'll have whatever Bonecrkr's drinking. bush and mccain are brave regulators? good one.

[TheMouthPeace]

Google this:

FEDERAL HOUSING ENTERPRISE REGULATORY REFORM ACT OF 2005

Read it. Then rethink your post. McCain wanted to REGULATE Fannie Mae.

Barack did not...

Stop filling the Internet with lies.

[blangston86]

u forgot to explain why mccain/bush couldn't push it through a republican congress and how this regulaiton would have prevented the financial crisis and how mccain plans to fix it with 83 wall street lobbeyists on his campaign staff. obama has zero.

[TheMouthPeace]

Wrong...it was introduced before the elections in 2006, and the Democrats blocked it in Committee throughtout 2006.

It was brought back as Senate Bill 1100 in 2007.

Chris Dodd and Barack Obama never even brought it up for discussion.

The facts are not on your side. Google it!

[blangston86]

the democrats couldn't block it in committee because they werent in power in 2006. u sidestepped how this regulation would have prevented the crisis and how mccain and his lobbeyist buds are going to fix it. mccain is a deregulater look at his words.

[TheMouthPeace]

Yes they could. They did not show up for votes. You have to have a super-majority of 60% to push anything you want through. The bill was reintroduced in 2007, Senate Bill 1100. Google it. No vote, no debate. Nothing. I wonder why?

[blangston86]

um you guys alreddy lost this debate on sex ed before a real issue the stock market crisis bit mccain in the ass. your wasting your time.

[Bonecrkr]

Not only does Obama have very close ties to the people (now fired) who caused the problem, both McCain and Bush have, in the past, have tried to push through regulation that would have stopped this from happening. Both were blocked by a democratically controlled Congress. This situation was created by the democrats and the reforms were blocked by democrats. The people who looted the system have close ties to Obama. One of them is his advisor on the economy.

[martman123456]

What? This problem is not 2 years old. Market deregulation caused this financial crisis. Look up the Glass-Steagal Act that protected markets against bank speculation. Then look up the Gramm-Leach-Bliley Act, which Phil Gramm wrote and the REPUBLICAN congress passed by a veto-proof majority in 1999, repealing Glass Steagal at the request of banks. BTW, Gramm is responsible for McCain's economic plan, which McCain hasn't even changed on his website.

[TheMouthPeace]

HAHA!

Glass Steagal? Are you crazy? THIS IS ALL SUB-PRIME MORTGAGES.

THE WHOLE THING!

THINK FANNIE MAE!

Banking Deregulation saved our butts. It is not the commercial banks that are suffering, genius. It is the investment banks, and they are suffering because they did not diversify.

Gramm-Leach-Bliley allowed the banks to diversify.  It is only those that did not that are suffering.

So many faux experts out here....my goodness.

[martman123456]

Wow, you'd think Wikipedia made you an expert. Sub-prime did not take off until Gramm-Leach Bliley. Before, they were handled largely by local savings and loans, which were much more effective in assessing individual risk. Yes diversification was good, but asset securitization and resecuritization also became possible, which allowed large banks to hold pools of mortgages they didn't originate and didn't assess. Fannie and Freddie don't regulate or originate. They are the casualties.

[TheMouthPeace]

Subprime loans were supported by Fannie Mae, who then securitized them and sold the to the banks. The investment banks did not issue or guarantee the loans, Fannie Mae did.

The investment banks just bought the Fannie Mae sub-prime securities, which we now know are worthless because Fannie was constantly cooking the books.

[martman123456]

First, Fannie does not issue loans. It only guarantees them, and has done it since the 30s. That's not a "cause" of this problem. Gramm-Leach-Bliley, Republican legislation, removed the Glass-Steagal prohibitions against banks engaging in several businesses through FHCs: originating, appraising, securitizing, and resecuritizing. Each bank then had an incentive to muck the appraisals and originate as many loans as possible to collect fees. That's the subprime crisis.

[TheMouthPeace]

No kidding, they issue securities so investors can buy the loans.

Thanks for the obvious.

[martman123456]

I was just correcting you. You're welcome.

[TheMouthPeace]

I never said they issue the actual loan money. They guarantee it. You corrected nobody.

[TheMouthPeace]

By securitizing the loans in marketable securities they expanded the market. Those securities became very hard to value and Fannie never accurately accounted for their underlying value, meaning investors were buying junk securities they thought were investment grade.

You are talking about mortgage originators. Most of those are not even banks! They simply collect the loan application data, much of which was a sham. Without Fannie taking undue risks this never happens, they caused it.

[martman123456]

Fannie has been securitizing mortgage obligations for 60 years. They did't just decide to "expand the market" in the last 10. Second, mortgage originators ARE banks, they're part of FHCs, made possible by Gramm-Leach-Bliley. Countrywide Home loans = subsidiary of Countrywide Financial, an FHC (i.e. a bank), which both originated and appraised the asset pools sold to Fannie. The Glass Steagal Act specifically prohibited this practice. Phil Gramm and the Republicans repealed it in 1999.

[TheMouthPeace]

The Clinton Administration did start this 10 years ago. Clinton slapped regulations on banks that fined them if they did not issue a set % of low-income loans. Fannie agreed to securitize them. Sub-prime started 10 years ago under Clinton. Just Google it!

[martman123456]

Dude, I'm a corporate attorney. I don't need to google my information. You keep bringing up irrelevant facts. So first it was "Fannie Mae caused the crisis in the last 2 years," and now it's Clinton who encouraged Fannie Mae to issue subprime loans. Fannie Mae doesn't issue loans (but you know that). The problem is not subprime loans, it's prime loans that should have been subprime. It's the bank structure that allowed and encouraged negligent risk assessment and valuation.

[TheMouthPeace]

This crisis was years in the making. The mortgages that are going bad were taken out 5 and 6 years ago. When did housing prices start to take off?

The problem is not sub-prime loans? Do you read a newspaper? THE PROBLEM IS ENTIRELY SUBPRIME LOANS! If not for those securities going bad, none of these banks would need rescuing.

You are a neophyte, and apparently not a very good lawyer.

[TheMouthPeace]

Google This...

NEW YORK TIMES

New Agency Proposed to Oversee Freddie Mac and Fannie Mae

By STEPHEN LABATON

Spetember 11, 2003

The Bush administration today recommended the most significant

regulatory overhaul in the housing finance industry since the savings

and loan crisis a decade ago.

[martman123456]

I supported tighter regulation back then, even in the aftermath of Sarbanes-Oxley. But no bill ever came of it. Hmm . . . and what exactly happened there? I suppose democrats controlled the white house and congress in 2003 as well. The Republican Congress killed that deal.

[TheMouthPeace]

If the subprime securities where properly priced to true risk to begin with, they would have sold for a higher interest rate, meaning the mortgage loans themselves would have to have a higher rates. That would have made it harder for poor credit borrowers to by $300,000 homes. Get it? Fannie made valuing these securities impossible because you could never tell how many bad loans were in the basket.

[TheMouthPeace]

You understand none of this. Fannie Mae fuelled the entire subprime crisis because the guaranteed the loans. Now we know that those guarantees were worthless.

That is what caused Lehman and Bear Stearns to go under. They were stupid enough to believe Fannie Mae securities were worth the paper they were written on. Big Government caused this by not regulating it's own sponsored enterprises and paying their CEO's billions.

[TheMouthPeace]

millions, not billions.  The taxpayer is on the hook for billions. Thanks to Chris Dodd and Barack Obama looking the other way on the Banking Committee for the last 2 years.

What a sham!

[TheMouthPeace]

Fannie does the asset securitization that you are talking about. You do not even know what they do...they bundle loans and sell them as securities. That is what fuelled this. They only started doing in in the Clinton administration, big surprise. When did housing start to take off? 1998! That is when this started, this is just when it is ending. You guys simply do not understand economics.

[martman123456]

I like how you're changing the argument at every turn. I wasn't arguing that Fannie Mae wasn't involved in the crisis. I was arguing it was not the cause. Banking deregulation was the cause. Microecon 101 would have supplied all of your answers (but this is not an economics problem). If you don't understand how bankring deregulation caused the financial crisis, well then, you don't understand exactly how banks and asset securitization works.

[TheMouthPeace]

Bank deregulation is not the cause, it is the only reason many banks survived. They were allowed to diversify. If you are a corporate attorney, you must be a bad one. Law school is a shitty place to learn Economics, apparently. Microeconomics is Theory of the Firm, as in the individual business, banking systems are MACROECONOMICS.

You are a pretender.

[TheMouthPeace]

Glass Steagall only applies to commercial banks. Commercial banks are not going out of business, are they? Investment banks are. You do not seem to know the difference.

[martman123456]

Listen, you can't try to google information and try to have an intelligent conversation with me. Look it up again. Then tell me that Glass Steagal only applied to commercial banks (hint: why couldn't commercial banks do investment banking before Gramm-Leach Bliley).

[theruteger]

Good video as it solely uses the facts from the very bill Obama Sponsored in the Illinois Senate.

[PukuTheBear]

Advertisers know about impressioning. Ayers is a master at education. He writes articles and speaks on how to build education programs.

Cults like to put themselves between the sexes as an element of control.

If Pulic Allies is brainwashing, maybe we should look into the Obama & Ayers connection.

Are they trying to brainwash children early?

Sex education that promotes homos and lesbians? Let's all go on the Ellen show. Is that in the bill?

[bitterclinger]

Excellent & thorough...thanks for doing this!

[Ricardofuartues]

Greta video, very "comprehensive"

[obamasucksballs]

A peek inside Obama's demented soul...

[TheMouthPeace]

You do not have to be an arch Conservative to believe that teaching about HIV can wait awhile...and if you are going to teach about such things, why is it so bad to reinforce family and marriage? Our poorest countrymen suffer from too little familial responsibility, and the compassionate liberals do not seem to care about that. Talking about family values is not conservative or liberal, it is the right thing to do for everyone...

[gretanojoke]

Obama is a "slave" to the radical left Marxists who want to destroy this country. If you vote for him, we will soon look like Russia. You will see more poverty, less families, more of state jobs and education,more perversion leading to a pagan environment, more starvation, more homelessness, more drugs and no alternative voices under penalty of prison. You like Castro..you'll like Obama.